Prestwick-3
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The M77...
Age: 41
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prestwick-3
That's the 2019/2020 accounts available from the airport website.
https://www.glasgowprestwick.com/cor...and-reporting/
https://www.glasgowprestwick.com/cor...and-reporting/
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SW Scotland
Age: 40
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the heads up, I look forward to reading those in full later. After a quick glance though, passenger and freight revenue are unchanged, but with a massive uptick in fuel sales, presumably form more transit traffic. Good news short term, but that kind of business can easily switch to another airport at any point. Does anyone know how long the contract with the USAF is due to run?
Hopefully the profits can be invested wisely to help grow other aspects of the business to provide a more stable base in future.
Hopefully the profits can be invested wisely to help grow other aspects of the business to provide a more stable base in future.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Search this (https://cis.energy.dla.mil/ipcis/Ipcis) for Prestwick and it appears that a new contract was in place from 1st May 2020 continuing to 30th September 2024. Downloading the spreadsheet and ranking the airports by contract value shows Prestwick to have the ninth-largest contract by value. That said, there has been a marked reduction in USAF transit traffic since the beginning of the pandemic with a consequent reduction in fuel sales. On the other hand, there has been between three and five USN P8s temporarily based since mid-November who are presumably covered by the fuel contract.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Scotland
Age: 64
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good to see the airfield returning to profit in 2019-20 (£5.5m) although like all aviation related businesses the impact of Covid-19 will not be fully felt within these accounts and the 2020-21 figures will be more telling as to future prospects. However there are some positive noises coning from the directors as to the future but time will tell. The following quote from the report regarding the potential sale is worthy of note. . "The coronavirus pandemic continues to have a devastating impact on global aviation, creating challenging circumstances for all businesses operating in the sector. However, despite this the business remains in a strong financial position and an attractive asset and during the past few months have received notes of interest from potential buyers and investors." Let's see what pans out but well done to the PIK Management on the results for 2019-20. They have been maligned at every opportunity by sections of the press and other commentators but they have kept the old lady afloat. I still think the PAX operation is holding the airfield back but let's see what pans out.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Sunday Post:
ScottishPower Renewables (SPR) wants to build 18 turbines 30 miles south of Prestwick but claims the airport is offering to withdraw its objection in return for payments for the next 25 years. The company’s lawyers said the need for the annual payments has not been detailed by the airport, adding: “Prestwick is obviously anxious to apply its standard approach to wind farms: namely to force the applicant to sign a confidential agreement on terms acceptable to Prestwick that will secure a long-term commercial income stream. “We submit that Prestwick’s approach is unlawful.” Documents seen by The Sunday Post show the Ayrshire airport has already received more than £8 million from wind farm companies in the past four years, including £4.4m in the past financial year when profits of £5.5m were reported – the first time the airport had been in the black since being bought by the Scottish Government for £1 in 2013. Prestwick managers claim the proposed Clauchrie wind farm will interfere with the radar system and have refused to withdraw an objection to the plans unless SPR offers an annual compensation payment to the state-owned transport hub. SPR, which has already handed over millions in compensation payments to the airport in exchange for withdrawing an objection to another local wind farm, has so far refused to agree to the latest demands. The Sunday Post View: If this is really the cost of doing business, we’re all paying it The airport says the request is justified because the wind farm will impact on air space in the region. However, operators say cash from developers has already paid for a new £5m turbine-tolerant radar, which will be brought into service this summer. In planning papers, the renewables firm suggested compensation payments from existing wind farms accounted for a substantial proportion of the airport’s profits in 2020. TS Prestwick Holdco – a private company owned by the Scottish Government – issued an upbeat press release in December last year when it posted a profit of £5.5m, with chief executive Stewart Adams claiming it was down to the “development of new revenue opportunities and customers”. However, in evidence to a planning inquiry, Anne MacKenzie, SPR’s senior aviation manager who previously worked at Prestwick, said: “The £4,452,000 received in 2020 would appear to be a significant contributor to TS Prestwick Holdco’s overall profit of £5.5m.” Sources close to the process said: “The airport is using money from wind farm developers to prop up their business and include the wind farm mitigation money as revenue.” With the exception of 2019/20, the airport made huge losses every year since the Scottish Government bought it in 2013 to protect jobs when then-owner Infratil failed to find a buyer. Ministers have propped up the facility with £43m of taxpayers’ money to save it from closure. Scottish Transport Secretary Michael Matheson has been trying to sell the airport and announced an unnamed preferred bidder in February, two months after the airport posted a profit, but the deal has stalled. A cargo plane’s jet engines ripped up the asphalt on the runway at the airport last month, prompting a safety alert. Sources claimed an internal management report two years ago flagged the need for remedial work on the runway but some of the repairs have not yet been commissioned and are unlikely to be done before world leaders are expected to fly in to the airport for the COP26 climate summit in November. The airport has objected to SPR’s plans, claiming its existing radar will detect 11 of the 18 turbines. The airport states it will only remove its objection if SPR offers an annual contribution for each of the 25 years Clauchrie operates. Zoe Kilpatrick, the airport’s commercial director, insisted there remained long-term safety concerns about the development of wind farms near the airport and insisted there would be additional costs from staff training, as well as upgrades to the radar system.
She said: “For the years ended 31 December 2018 and 2019 SPR reported a net profit of £150m and £284m, respectively. “Given SPR and the airport are both commercial organisations, the amount to be charged should therefore be left to negotiation as would be expected in any commercial environment…it is part of its cost of doing business.” However, SPR last week submitted a report to the planning inquiry that accused airport bosses of unlawfully attempting to squeeze them for cash. The report, by law firm Shepherd and Wedderburn, said unchallenged evidence at the inquiry showed the airport received £8.2m from wind farm firms in the last three years and ring-fenced £6m for radar upgrades. The report stated: “The evidence shows wind farm developers have already paid the full cost of installing Prestwick’s wind farm tolerant radar system and expanding it at some point in the near future.” SPR lawyers went on to accuse the airport of acting unlawfully: “Perhaps most surprising of all is that Miss Kilpatrick was unwilling to disclose in public the amount of money Prestwick seeks from the applicants in relation to the proposal. “In the absence of that disclosure and any clarity from Prestwick as to what they would spend these secret sums on, it is impossible to conclude that such payments would be reasonable never mind lawful. “Prestwick’s approach to negotiating payments might be appropriate in a negotiation between two commercial organisations discussing a private contract to provide goods or services…we have no hesitation in submitting that Prestwick’s position on ‘mitigation’ in the context of the proposal is unlawful.” SPR aviation expert Anne MacKenzie, who worked for Prestwick’s former owners Infratil for six years until July 2011, said: “GPA seems to be seeking perpetual support of its essential surveillance infrastructure by electricity consumers via wind farm operators, rather than from its customers, ie passengers.” MacKenzie also gave a withering assessment of the transport hub’s future. She said Prestwick was now the fifth-busiest airport in Scotland for passenger numbers, having been overtaken by Inverness. It was already behind Aberdeen, Edinburgh and close rivals Glasgow. She said: “Ignoring 2020, during which Covid-19 had a catastrophic impact on pax (passenger) numbers, by 2019, GPA had the lowest annual pax numbers of the five airports.” Prestwick is also at the bottom of the league table for aircraft movements, a crucial revenue stream. The airport conceded in its evidence to the planning inquiry that its Wind Farm Radar Mitigation Scheme had already been purchased and was in the final stages of operational trials. South Ayrshire Council has referred the application to an independent Scottish Government Reporter and a decision is expected later this month. SPR said: “The comments represent ScottishPower Renewables’ position on planning issues and were raised in the appropriate forum of the planning inquiry. We now await the Reporter’s decision.” The Scottish Government said: “It would not be appropriate to comment on a live application, which will be determined by Scottish ministers in due course. “Glasgow Prestwick Airport is operated on a commercial basis and at arm’s length from the Scottish Government. Ministers do not intervene in commercial discussions at the airport. “The process to return Glasgow Prestwick Airport to the private sector continues and we have committed to updating Parliament on the sale process at the appropriate stage.” Shadow Transport Secretary Liam Kerr said: “Serious questions must be answered. Ministers must urgently confirm whether they were aware of airport bosses demanding these payments and when. “The Scottish Government has thrown millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money at Prestwick Airport without any coherent plan to turn it around. “Now a questionable picture of the airport’s finances may be presented to potential buyers. The public deserve to know what is going on. It is, after all, their money.” The Demand ScottishPower Renewables last week sent its final submission to the inquiry into the proposed Clauchrie wind farm. The report by law firm Shepherd & Wedderburn includes several sections raising concerns about the airport’s demands. It says: “A wind farm-tolerant radar – the Scanter – will be brought into service this summer. Then, any clutter from wind farms that presents on radar screens will be removed. “That is the purpose of the Scanter and that is the reason wind farm developers have paid Prestwick millions to fully fund the cost of installing the new radar system.” The report gives a withering assessment of the airport’s insistence that unspecified amounts should be paid by SPR each year for 25 years: “We have no hesitation in submitting Prestwick’s position is unlawful. The point is that Prestwick believes it should be entitled to charge what it considers appropriate and to do so in private with no external scrutiny whatsoever. That is clearly an unreasonable approach.” The report goes on: “The suggestion that an unspecified Department for Transport policy allows Prestwick to charge the applicants unspecified sums to cover unspecified risks at an unspecified date should patently be given no credence.” It adds: “(The airport is) unwilling to disclose the amount of money it seeks from the applicants in relation to the proposal. In the absence of that disclosure and any clarity from Prestwick, it is impossible to conclude that such payments would be reasonable never mind lawful.” The report concludes: “For the reasons set out above, we submit that Prestwick’s approach is unlawful.” What the airport says Prestwick Airport denies acting unlawfully in demanding payment from the wind farm operator and yesterday a spokesman said: “Wind farms cause considerable impacts upon radar performance and, for that reason, can pose a risk to aviation safety, which is the airport’s paramount concern. “Glasgow Prestwick Airport has invested in radar technology which has the ability to mitigate some, but not all, of the impacts upon radar performance. “However, there are costs and risks associated with considering each individual wind farm planning application, calibrating the technology to allow it to deal with any particular wind farm and thereafter ongoing costs associated with maintaining the performance of that technology over the lifespan of a wind farm, which is clearly essential in the interests of aviation safety. “It is typically recognised and the industry norm that the party benefiting from the wind farm should provide compensation to radar operators for the associated costs and risks. “SPR operates its own radar technology at Kincardine and typically enters into similar agreements with other wind farm developers who benefit from access to their radar technology. “We gave full evidence to the inquiry that if permission is granted for the proposed development, the airspace above it will be compromised and that the airport will require to bear the costs and risks for the lifetime of the development in minimising that impact. “SPR dispute that the airport has any legal entitlement to the payments. When SPR used the word ‘unlawful’ in submissions, it was arguing that the airport had ‘no legal entitlement’ rather than the airport had broken the law. “The airport maintains that it has a legal entitlement to the charges it is seeking.” Aviation has had to accept wind farms are a vital part of our future by David Learmount, an aviation journalist and former RAF pilot Airports use radar to monitor – and where necessary control – aircraft in their vicinity. For a long time there have been two main types of radar: primary and secondary. Primary radar is what most people think of when they visualise radar systems: a pulse of electronic energy is sent out, the reflected “return” from an aircraft is received, and the aircraft’s position displayed as a “blip” on a screen. Secondary radar, on the other hand, sends out an interrogative signal that is received by a transponder in the aircraft, and the transponder replies with a signal that reveals not only the aircraft’s position, but its identification, and other information like its altitude and destination. Airports such as Prestwick usually have both types. Radar works well with aircraft, because when airborne they are the only large objects up in the sky, so they can be seen distinctly. If aircraft are close to the ground, primary radar picks up “clutter” caused by reflection from hills, buildings, or even trees and flocks of birds, and this can obscure the aircraft’s “blip” return on the radar display. That includes reflections from wind farm turbines. Indeed, the latter are a particular problem because they are big, very high, and their moving blades confuse conventional radar, causing on-screen clutter that can obscure aircraft returns at low altitude. Radar signals work in line of sight. They cannot “see” anything over the horizon – or beyond a hill – any more than the human eye can. If large objects such as wind turbines are close to a radar installation, they can render it almost useless, but many miles awaythey are much less of a problem. Wind turbines are not allowed to be built close to airports because they are a collision risk to aircraft taking off or approaching to land. Aviation has had to accept wind farms are a vital part of the world’s future, so the industry is being forced to adapt to this new status quo. Fortunately, new types of radar – generically referred to as “smart radar” because installed software distinguishes between useful returns and clutter – have been developed and are becoming increasingly widely used by airports all over the world. Prestwick itself is installing a smart radar called Scanter, which can mitigate radar returns from wind farms and other ground clutter, but it also provides additional surveillance capabilities that bring benefits for airport management.
She said: “For the years ended 31 December 2018 and 2019 SPR reported a net profit of £150m and £284m, respectively. “Given SPR and the airport are both commercial organisations, the amount to be charged should therefore be left to negotiation as would be expected in any commercial environment…it is part of its cost of doing business.” However, SPR last week submitted a report to the planning inquiry that accused airport bosses of unlawfully attempting to squeeze them for cash. The report, by law firm Shepherd and Wedderburn, said unchallenged evidence at the inquiry showed the airport received £8.2m from wind farm firms in the last three years and ring-fenced £6m for radar upgrades. The report stated: “The evidence shows wind farm developers have already paid the full cost of installing Prestwick’s wind farm tolerant radar system and expanding it at some point in the near future.” SPR lawyers went on to accuse the airport of acting unlawfully: “Perhaps most surprising of all is that Miss Kilpatrick was unwilling to disclose in public the amount of money Prestwick seeks from the applicants in relation to the proposal. “In the absence of that disclosure and any clarity from Prestwick as to what they would spend these secret sums on, it is impossible to conclude that such payments would be reasonable never mind lawful. “Prestwick’s approach to negotiating payments might be appropriate in a negotiation between two commercial organisations discussing a private contract to provide goods or services…we have no hesitation in submitting that Prestwick’s position on ‘mitigation’ in the context of the proposal is unlawful.” SPR aviation expert Anne MacKenzie, who worked for Prestwick’s former owners Infratil for six years until July 2011, said: “GPA seems to be seeking perpetual support of its essential surveillance infrastructure by electricity consumers via wind farm operators, rather than from its customers, ie passengers.” MacKenzie also gave a withering assessment of the transport hub’s future. She said Prestwick was now the fifth-busiest airport in Scotland for passenger numbers, having been overtaken by Inverness. It was already behind Aberdeen, Edinburgh and close rivals Glasgow. She said: “Ignoring 2020, during which Covid-19 had a catastrophic impact on pax (passenger) numbers, by 2019, GPA had the lowest annual pax numbers of the five airports.” Prestwick is also at the bottom of the league table for aircraft movements, a crucial revenue stream. The airport conceded in its evidence to the planning inquiry that its Wind Farm Radar Mitigation Scheme had already been purchased and was in the final stages of operational trials. South Ayrshire Council has referred the application to an independent Scottish Government Reporter and a decision is expected later this month. SPR said: “The comments represent ScottishPower Renewables’ position on planning issues and were raised in the appropriate forum of the planning inquiry. We now await the Reporter’s decision.” The Scottish Government said: “It would not be appropriate to comment on a live application, which will be determined by Scottish ministers in due course. “Glasgow Prestwick Airport is operated on a commercial basis and at arm’s length from the Scottish Government. Ministers do not intervene in commercial discussions at the airport. “The process to return Glasgow Prestwick Airport to the private sector continues and we have committed to updating Parliament on the sale process at the appropriate stage.” Shadow Transport Secretary Liam Kerr said: “Serious questions must be answered. Ministers must urgently confirm whether they were aware of airport bosses demanding these payments and when. “The Scottish Government has thrown millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money at Prestwick Airport without any coherent plan to turn it around. “Now a questionable picture of the airport’s finances may be presented to potential buyers. The public deserve to know what is going on. It is, after all, their money.” The Demand ScottishPower Renewables last week sent its final submission to the inquiry into the proposed Clauchrie wind farm. The report by law firm Shepherd & Wedderburn includes several sections raising concerns about the airport’s demands. It says: “A wind farm-tolerant radar – the Scanter – will be brought into service this summer. Then, any clutter from wind farms that presents on radar screens will be removed. “That is the purpose of the Scanter and that is the reason wind farm developers have paid Prestwick millions to fully fund the cost of installing the new radar system.” The report gives a withering assessment of the airport’s insistence that unspecified amounts should be paid by SPR each year for 25 years: “We have no hesitation in submitting Prestwick’s position is unlawful. The point is that Prestwick believes it should be entitled to charge what it considers appropriate and to do so in private with no external scrutiny whatsoever. That is clearly an unreasonable approach.” The report goes on: “The suggestion that an unspecified Department for Transport policy allows Prestwick to charge the applicants unspecified sums to cover unspecified risks at an unspecified date should patently be given no credence.” It adds: “(The airport is) unwilling to disclose the amount of money it seeks from the applicants in relation to the proposal. In the absence of that disclosure and any clarity from Prestwick, it is impossible to conclude that such payments would be reasonable never mind lawful.” The report concludes: “For the reasons set out above, we submit that Prestwick’s approach is unlawful.” What the airport says Prestwick Airport denies acting unlawfully in demanding payment from the wind farm operator and yesterday a spokesman said: “Wind farms cause considerable impacts upon radar performance and, for that reason, can pose a risk to aviation safety, which is the airport’s paramount concern. “Glasgow Prestwick Airport has invested in radar technology which has the ability to mitigate some, but not all, of the impacts upon radar performance. “However, there are costs and risks associated with considering each individual wind farm planning application, calibrating the technology to allow it to deal with any particular wind farm and thereafter ongoing costs associated with maintaining the performance of that technology over the lifespan of a wind farm, which is clearly essential in the interests of aviation safety. “It is typically recognised and the industry norm that the party benefiting from the wind farm should provide compensation to radar operators for the associated costs and risks. “SPR operates its own radar technology at Kincardine and typically enters into similar agreements with other wind farm developers who benefit from access to their radar technology. “We gave full evidence to the inquiry that if permission is granted for the proposed development, the airspace above it will be compromised and that the airport will require to bear the costs and risks for the lifetime of the development in minimising that impact. “SPR dispute that the airport has any legal entitlement to the payments. When SPR used the word ‘unlawful’ in submissions, it was arguing that the airport had ‘no legal entitlement’ rather than the airport had broken the law. “The airport maintains that it has a legal entitlement to the charges it is seeking.” Aviation has had to accept wind farms are a vital part of our future by David Learmount, an aviation journalist and former RAF pilot Airports use radar to monitor – and where necessary control – aircraft in their vicinity. For a long time there have been two main types of radar: primary and secondary. Primary radar is what most people think of when they visualise radar systems: a pulse of electronic energy is sent out, the reflected “return” from an aircraft is received, and the aircraft’s position displayed as a “blip” on a screen. Secondary radar, on the other hand, sends out an interrogative signal that is received by a transponder in the aircraft, and the transponder replies with a signal that reveals not only the aircraft’s position, but its identification, and other information like its altitude and destination. Airports such as Prestwick usually have both types. Radar works well with aircraft, because when airborne they are the only large objects up in the sky, so they can be seen distinctly. If aircraft are close to the ground, primary radar picks up “clutter” caused by reflection from hills, buildings, or even trees and flocks of birds, and this can obscure the aircraft’s “blip” return on the radar display. That includes reflections from wind farm turbines. Indeed, the latter are a particular problem because they are big, very high, and their moving blades confuse conventional radar, causing on-screen clutter that can obscure aircraft returns at low altitude. Radar signals work in line of sight. They cannot “see” anything over the horizon – or beyond a hill – any more than the human eye can. If large objects such as wind turbines are close to a radar installation, they can render it almost useless, but many miles awaythey are much less of a problem. Wind turbines are not allowed to be built close to airports because they are a collision risk to aircraft taking off or approaching to land. Aviation has had to accept wind farms are a vital part of the world’s future, so the industry is being forced to adapt to this new status quo. Fortunately, new types of radar – generically referred to as “smart radar” because installed software distinguishes between useful returns and clutter – have been developed and are becoming increasingly widely used by airports all over the world. Prestwick itself is installing a smart radar called Scanter, which can mitigate radar returns from wind farms and other ground clutter, but it also provides additional surveillance capabilities that bring benefits for airport management.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Everywhere and nowhere
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An energy company complaining that it is the victim of an extortion racket must be the irony of the year 😂.
All airports need to exploit anything in their favour at the moment and if the ‘victim’ is a heavily tax-payer subsidised Scottish company then it’s ‘wooden dollars’ and fair game.
All airports need to exploit anything in their favour at the moment and if the ‘victim’ is a heavily tax-payer subsidised Scottish company then it’s ‘wooden dollars’ and fair game.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Scottish Transport Secretary Michael Matheson has been trying to sell the airport and announced an unnamed preferred bidder in February, two months after the airport posted a profit, but the deal has stalled."
Does 'stalled' mean 'off'?
Does 'stalled' mean 'off'?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ban Chiang,Thailand
Age: 67
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The word is Prestwick has been running at an operating profit recently, however, USAF movements have sharply tailed-off after the Afghan troop pull-out was completed. June was a busy month for both C-17s and KC-135s.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last accounts showed an operating profit to the year March 2020. Having relatively few passenger flights, the financial performance may not have worsened as much as airports more dependent on that sector.
I understand they generate a fair bit on income from supplying fuel to US military aircraft. The info here (https://cis.energy.dla.mil/ipcis/Ipcis) shows the uplifts (I don't know the units) which looked pretty healthy in June as you say, but also in November and December when a number of USN P8s were based.
05/20 38,948
06/20 79,367
07/20 187,564
08/20 56,031
11/20 509,592
12/20 731,128
01/21 126,763
03/21 130,309
04/21 196,260
05/21 265,110
06/21 549,238
I understand they generate a fair bit on income from supplying fuel to US military aircraft. The info here (https://cis.energy.dla.mil/ipcis/Ipcis) shows the uplifts (I don't know the units) which looked pretty healthy in June as you say, but also in November and December when a number of USN P8s were based.
05/20 38,948
06/20 79,367
07/20 187,564
08/20 56,031
11/20 509,592
12/20 731,128
01/21 126,763
03/21 130,309
04/21 196,260
05/21 265,110
06/21 549,238
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One source said: “My understanding is that the preferred bidder is still waiting for an answer on a new lower bid.”
Another said: "I have heard the Scottish Government is swithering as to whether they really want to do the deal and worried about the political optics
https://www.scotsman.com/news/transp...rwUH3jGG6SCPSI
Another said: "I have heard the Scottish Government is swithering as to whether they really want to do the deal and worried about the political optics
https://www.scotsman.com/news/transp...rwUH3jGG6SCPSI
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UK
Age: 53
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rumours of huge investment from one of the current based aerospace industries in the next few years… on a knife edge and unrelated to actual airport/terminal ownership
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spirit?
In other news Storm have bought Chevron with the former saying "Glasgow Prestwick Airport has the potential to become a core hub for training as well as aircraft line and base maintenance for FL Technics Group clients worldwide"
https://newsroom.aviator.aero/storm-...ance-location/
In other news Storm have bought Chevron with the former saying "Glasgow Prestwick Airport has the potential to become a core hub for training as well as aircraft line and base maintenance for FL Technics Group clients worldwide"
https://newsroom.aviator.aero/storm-...ance-location/
In other words what GIANT subsidy can they extort from the Scots Tax payer.
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: Manchester
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The place might just have a future if they can get rid of that oversized 1960s terminal which operates nothing more than a few Ryanair flights per week. Or is taking away flights to the Costas and making the local population drive another half hour to GLA too hot politically for them? 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prestwick Spaceport Moves Closer to Lift Off with Astraius Air Launch Partnership
Prestwick Spaceport Moves Closer to Lift Off with Astraius Air Launch Partnership ? Parabolic Arc
Prestwick Spaceport Moves Closer to Lift Off with Astraius Air Launch Partnership ? Parabolic Arc
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No idea. Presumably they can't just lease a military one (in an Air Tanker A330-type arrangement), and I'd be surprised if an air force anywhere would sell one to them. Even if they did, they'd presumably have to try and get it certified for civilian use.
Their Chairman is Sir George Zambellas, First Sea Lord and Head of the Royal Navy from 2013 to 2016, so presumably he at least has asked that question and got a satisfactory answer.
Their Chairman is Sir George Zambellas, First Sea Lord and Head of the Royal Navy from 2013 to 2016, so presumably he at least has asked that question and got a satisfactory answer.